Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
“First, leadership is a process that is not specifically a function of the person in charge. Leadership is a function of individual wills and individual needs, and the result of the dynamics of collective will organized to meet those various needs. Second, leadership is a process of adaptation and of evolution; it is a process of dynamic exchange and the interchanges of value. Leadership is deviation from convention. Third, leadership is a process of energy, not structure. In this way, leadership is different from management – managers pursue stability, while leadership is all about change.”* Once again, during the 2011-2012 year, like the first year of my function, around one half of the issues reported to the Ombuds had to do with evaluation ("evaluative relationship") and career progression and development. These two categories are linked to the role of managers or leaders. This is also usually the case in other institutions, where managers are promoted to such a function due primarily to their outstanding technical skills, and not so much by taking their potential for human leadership - or their lack thereof - into consideration. Scientific excellence in research, education and innovation is the cornerstone of our culture. The Laboratory would gain even more efficiency by promoting a corresponding excellence in human leadership. Ultimately, all case issues have an impact on the work and dedication of our personnel; a respectful workplace environment is the best guarantee of the highest effectiveness in all our missions**. That calls for leadership driven by good ethics, beyond pure management and control. Conclusion: From the many cases that I have seen, I believe that our culture should equally promote and include a culture favouring an excellence in leadership. How? By making use of the new tool we have: the integrated Competency Model. Number of cases by issue during the period July 2011 to June 2012 * “Leadership and Change: The Case for Greater Ethical Clarity”, by Bernard Burnes and Rune Todnem, Journal of Business Ethics (2012), 108:239-252 and “The nature of Leadership”, by R.A. Barker (2001), Human Relations, 54(4), 469-494. ** See the column by Sharone Bar-David, in Canadian HRReporter, November 15, 2010 © Copyright Thomson Reuters Canada Ltd., November 15, 2010, Toronto, Ontario, (800) 387-5164. Web site: www.hrreporter.com Contact the Ombuds Early!
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,002 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle